World's smallest DSLM that shoots 4k?

[John Matthews]

3 minutes ago, mercer said:

Without looking at the actual specs, but having owned both cameras, I am pretty sure the FP is around the same size or smaller than the GX85. With lens options, you may have a point although the Sigma primes are fairly small.

To be honest, this move to mirrorless seems kinda pointless... you're trading body size for lens size. It's kinda mind boggling really.

I guess I've been out of the loop... I know the R5 had overheating issues... but it was my understanding they fixed it? Did I miss something?

I'm also pretty sure that the RF mount has plenty of smaller primes. With that said, I understand you're already invested in m4/3 but it may be time to start thinking about a different company because Panasonic isn't going back to smaller cameras unless you want a G100. Which I may be in the minority but I actually think it looks like a cool camera. 

It's close, but the Sigma with one of the smallest lenses is 637g! Yes, you get FF, but the GX850 with the 20mm is only 356g and much smaller. Also, the Sigma can't even do flash photography.

I can sell all my M43 gear and have sold most of it. I'm only left with the small (and less expensive) stuff. The fact is that I enjoy shooting my GX850 and I want a more modern replacement.

Concerning Canon, I just don't trust them (R5) and I'd certainly never buy anything RF- too expensive, too closed. It's a company that will only change if there's a scandal by pushing the cripple hammer too far (R5).

I wouldn't not buy the G100D. I had the G100 and shot a ton with it for a year. If the G100D actually has a significantly better EVF, I might buy it. Unfortunately, I think that was a seriously lazy update to a camera that has really sold well.

What camera do you take with you everywhere?

[mercer]

30 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

What camera do you take with you everywhere?

I have 3 that I enjoy for everyday shooting... a Minolta X-7a, a Pentax P3, and a Yashica FX3 Super 2000. If I'm going digital, I have a Pentax K10D with a 12mp CCD sensor and ibis that suits my needs.

Although I prefer video, I don't get out enough to shoot anything worthwhile for day trips. One day soon, I am hoping to shoot a short film or something and I'll probably use my 5D3.

I will say that I do miss shooting video with a small camera but even the GX85 I found to be fairly uncomfortable to shoot with and prefer a bigger camera. My dream camera would be a Nikon D5500 with DPAF, ibis and internal raw video (or ProRes)

[John Matthews]

1 minute ago, mercer said:

I have 3 that I enjoy for everyday shooting... a Minolta X-7a, a Pentax P3, and a Yashica FX3 Super 2000. If I'm going digital, I have a Pentax K10D with a 12mp CCD sensor and ibis that suits my needs.

Although I prefer video, I don't get out enough to shoot anything worthwhile for day trips. One day soon, I am hoping to shoot a short film or something and I'll probably use my 5D3.

I will say that I do miss shooting video with a small camera but even the GX85 I found to be fairly uncomfortable to shoot with and prefer a bigger camera. My dream camera would be a Nikon D5500 with DPAF, ibis and internal raw video (or ProRes)

That's a nice selection. I've thought about getting the K10D before.

My question was more about what camera you have with you at all times, not for everyday shooting. The reason I ask is that I personally find smart phones way too big for one-handed operation now and I'd rather have a small, cheap smart phone with a camera in the pocket than just a large smart phone.

[mercer]

I think I like smaller cameras in theory more than practice, if I'm being honest. But I also never had a problem with DSLRs. The only benefit for me to shooting mirrorless was the ability to shoot some different lenses... but then you had to deal with big and clunky adapters which kinda made the small mirrorless concept moot... not to mention the annoying crop factor.

[mercer]

2 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

That's a nice selection. I've thought about getting the K10D before.

My question was more about what camera you have with you at all times, not for everyday shooting. The reason I ask is that I personally find smart phones way too big for one-handed operation now and I'd rather have a small, cheap smart phone with a camera in the pocket than just a large smart phone.

I don't really have a camera with me at all times. I have my phone, but I only use it to take photos for work or if I need to make sure I'm buying the right thing.

If I could go back to a flip phone, I would in a heartbeat. 

[John Matthews]

8 minutes ago, mercer said:

I think I like smaller cameras in theory more than practice, if I'm being honest. But I also never had a problem with DSLRs. The only benefit for me to shooting mirrorless was the ability to shoot some different lenses... but then you had to deal with big and clunky adapters which kinda made the small mirrorless concept moot... not to mention the annoying crop factor.

My first real camera was a Pentax K1000. My first digital camera was the Olympus E-420 DSLR (at the time, it was the world's smallest DSLR). I especially like DSLR's for the ability to compose without turning on the camera. With mirrorless, I always seem to have a battery counter in the back of my mind. Sure, I could bring more batteries, but I still cannot get rid of the counter.

4 minutes ago, mercer said:

I don't really have a camera with me at all times. I have my phone, but I only use it to take photos for work or if I need to make sure I'm buying the right thing.

If I could go back to a flip phone, I would in a heartbeat. 

That is the whole point for why I started this thread- a small phone and a small camera is better than a big phone that is also a camera.

[mercer]

11 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

That's a nice selection. I've thought about getting the K10D before.

If you can find one for a good price, I recommend it. I paid less than $100 for mine with the box and less than 1000 shots on it.

The colors are amazing. 

[BTM_Pix]

1 hour ago, mercer said:

To be honest, this move to mirrorless seems kinda pointless... you're trading body size for lens size. It's kinda mind boggling really.

Panasonic showed their hand with the G9ii about how they view the new generation of MFT cameras really.

Depending on your point of view its either an S5ii with a tiny sensor or a G7 in a massive overcoat but the net result is the same in that its just not size appropriate to where everyone wants to see MFT.

So the "new" GX85 will not be coming from Panasonic.

But it is there in cameras like the a6700 or even the Nikon Z30 both of which have excellent fast primes from Sigma to balance the body size with the lens size but more importantly can shrink that further by deploying the secret weapon of the TechArt adapters to open up the M mount lenses.

Even on the Fp, using M mounts like the 35mm f2 7Artisans I have here produce very comparable total package sizes than if you were using MFT lenses with similar speed.

The huge difference with using E or Z mount cameras is that with the TechArt you get full AF of these MF M mount lenses as well as being able to do the same trick with an intermediate adapter for other compact lenses such as the Nikon Series E stuff.

With the e mount you can also use the wafer thin MFT to E mount adapter to mount any existing MF MFT lenses on to it like Meike cine primes etc.

If I was looking for an upgrade to a GX85 then I'd be giving the a6700 with M mount a serious look.

 

[MrSMW]

28 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

If I was looking for an upgrade to a GX85 then I'd be giving the a6700 with M mount a serious look.

Or one of the full frame A7C's for even greater cropping capability?

I think if I was starting all over again from scratch with everything, I might go this route...

I have avoided these single card slot cameras for pro work for many years, but actually, for my needs, units such as the FX30, A6700, A7Cii and A7CR, paired with some of the more recent compact APSC and FF zooms such as the Sigma 18-55 & 28-70, the Tamron 17-70 & 28-75, make HUGE sense as lightweight, compact options.

[John Matthews]

29 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Panasonic showed their hand with the G9ii about how they view the new generation of MFT cameras really.

Depending on your point of view its either an S5ii with a tiny sensor or a G7 in a massive overcoat but the net result is the same in that its just not size appropriate to where everyone wants to see MFT.

So the "new" GX85 will not be coming from Panasonic.

Very good point. I'd say the nail in the coffin is the G100D, not the G9ii. I don't think the G9ii is selling as well as they'd thought, but have no information. I only know that there's been great enthusiasm on YouTube; yet, they're certainly not sold out. The G100D is a lazy upgrade and if it doesn't sell well, they might come out with something else. I know that Sean from Lumix livestreams is always saying: "M43 isn't about size, but features". While this isn't entirely false, it isn't entirely true either. I've even asked why don't they make a F2.8 pancake and his response was "there are too many IQ compromises"; so, I guess Sony can do it, but not Panasonic.

It's time for Panasonic to either focus M43 on small or get rid of it because I don't think this strategy is going to work for long. They've confused all of their M43 users. Now, there are so many other options out there that they need to stop the bleeding.

40 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

If I was looking for an upgrade to a GX85 then I'd be giving the a6700 with M mount a serious look.

That's not me. GX85 is a "one and done" camera in my book. Also, if I were going Sony for video, why would I go for M mount if that negates the one feature (AF in video) that Sony does best? Does the Techart do proper continuous AF in video?

I'm a tiny camera and "big" camera combo seeker. I want a modern version of the GX850 at 270g, not the "heavy" 429g of a GX85. As mentioned before, I'd rather get the E-P7 at 337g with better IBIS, AF, and full-sensor readout.

[John Matthews]

1 hour ago, John Matthews said:

I've even asked why don't they make a F2.8 pancake and his response was "there are too many IQ compromises"; so, I guess Sony can do it, but not Panasonic.

*for L-mount

[BTM_Pix]

1 hour ago, John Matthews said:

Also, if I were going Sony for video, why would I go for M mount

Its not compulsory 😄

Or even either or.

I was just making the point that M mount is a route for keeping lens sizes compact and in proportion for both small bodies but also in general for those occasions where you want to remain discrete.

For everything else or all other times or somewhere in between  you can use the E mount with native lenses.

With the a6700 being APS-C then this gives you access to smaller AF lenses than FF.

If you use the Sigma ones then they are exactly the same size as the MFT ones so you gain the bigger sensor and the better balance as the camera has a bit more heft and of course the step change in AF and internal 10 bit.

Admittedly, it might go on fire but for those first ten minutes it will be a dream.

1 hour ago, John Matthews said:

Does the Techart do proper continuous AF in video?

Well, here is interesting and an object lesson in not taking everything says on the internet at face value !

This is the Nikon version and as the Sony version also has a mark 2 version then I had presumed that this would be included on that one too.

However, it doesn't explicitly state that it does or it doesn't so it would have to be confirmed by someone who has the new version and if it didn't at launch has it been addressed with firmware.

So, unless someone chimes in who actually owns a v2, I'd take it that the Sony version likely doesn't have continuous AF-C in video mode. It certainly does in stills mode but thats moot for most people (I use the original version with an A7Rii purely for stills as a (very) poor mans Leica M10 with AF).

 

[John Matthews]

23 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

With the a6700 being APS-C then this gives you access to smaller AF lenses than FF.

The A6700 is bigger and heavier than the Sigma FP.

[BTM_Pix]

27 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

The A6700 is bigger and heavier than the Sigma FP

Primarily because of the grip so if you add one to the Fp (and most people do) then it narrows the gap.

If you add the EVF into the mix then the optional one for the Fp (which I love by the way) makes the a6700 the winner.

But has IBIS, internal 10 bit, s-cinetone, AF that is on another level to it, tilt screen, gyro data for post stabilisation etc.

And maybe even AF of M mount lenses 😀

Again, its not an either or situation so for some people the Fp will be a better pick because it is smaller, has RAW versus compressed, has a bigger sensor and they might not care about AF or stabilisation at all.

I am that someone a lot of the time with the Fp but, on balance, I think I'd be taking the a6700 as an all rounder in a lot of situations over it if I had one.

As @MrSMW mentions, the A7Cii is then also in the mix if you want the option of both FF but also APS-C for compactness.

 

 

[mercer]

22 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Panasonic showed their hand with the G9ii about how they view the new generation of MFT cameras really.

Depending on your point of view its either an S5ii with a tiny sensor or a G7 in a massive overcoat but the net result is the same in that its just not size appropriate to where everyone wants to see MFT.

So the "new" GX85 will not be coming from Panasonic.

Without a doubt. Now I don't mind a bigger camera...

But...

I don't care how many features you add, m4/3 is still m4/3, and the point of the system was small and economical... wasn't it? I feel like Panasonic hit its apex with GH3 as far as ergonomics and proper price goes. Starting with the GH4, they started chasing the wrong things.

22 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

But it is there in cameras like the a6700 or even the Nikon Z30 both of which have excellent fast primes from Sigma to balance the body size with the lens size but more importantly can shrink that further by deploying the secret weapon of the TechArt adapters to open up the M mount lenses.

Both of those cameras fell completely off my radar. The a6700 is pretty impressive. As is the Z30, if we are to believe that Camera Conspiracies goofball.

The real problem I have is that there is no camera under $3000 that is an upgrade for me, but I live an under $1500 kinda world.

[BTM_Pix]

2 hours ago, mercer said:

I don't care how many features you add, m4/3 is still m4/3, and the point of the system was small and economical... wasn't it?

I've quoted this before during the G9ii saga but, yes, its right there on the front page of the Micro Four Thirds association official website.

2 hours ago, mercer said:

I feel like Panasonic hit its apex with GH3 as far as ergonomics and proper price goes. Starting with the GH4, they started chasing the wrong things.

That was the point at which they changed from being "Alternative Music" to "An Alternative To Similar Types Of Music".

They went from being The Smiths to being Coldplay basically.

2 hours ago, mercer said:

As is the Z30, if we are to believe that Camera Conspiracies goofball.

He is absolutely churning the content out at the moment for some reason.

2 hours ago, mercer said:

but I live an under $1500 kinda world.

If you went for this version of the Zfc you could live in both an under $1500 world and a Barbie world simultaneously.

[mercer]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

I've quoted this before during the G9ii saga but, yes, its right there on the front page of the Micro Four Thirds association official website.

That was the point at which they changed from being "Alternative Music" to "An Alternative To Similar Types Of Music".

They went from being The Smiths to being Coldplay basically.

He is absolutely churning the content out at the moment for some reason.

If you went for this version of the Zfc you could live in both an under $1500 world and a Barbie world simultaneously.

Classic BTM... haha!

I must admit, I'd really like a ZF but I'll have to wait a couple years for that one.

You're right, though about Panasonic... they used to be punk rock, now they're Rick Roll. He really is making a lot of videos. Camera Conspiracy can be a bit much, but I appreciate the shorter videos compared to others that force a 20 minute video out of a 10 minute subject.

With that said, I'm probably going to buy another GH6. I didn't love it the first time around m, but I think I was being too picky and I have a different... use-case for it now.

Honestly, I'm kinda tired of all cameras right now. 

[BTM_Pix]

32 minutes ago, mercer said:

Honestly, I'm kinda tired of all cameras right now. 

I've been saying that for the past 40 years and I almost mean it now.

[mercer]

27 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

I've been saying that for the past 40 years and I almost mean it now.

True enough. Part of me wants an FX30 because I love slog with monochrome set as the color... you really see the dynamic range of their cameras in B&W and I want to make a B&W film... but I also want the ProRes from the GH6 because I am so tired of transcoding footage... I just want to bring it into FCPX and start editing. 

[BTM_Pix]

11 minutes ago, mercer said:

True enough. Part of me wants an FX30 because I love slog with monochrome set as the color... you really see the dynamic range of their cameras in B&W and I want to make a B&W film... but I also want the ProRes from the GH6 because I am so tired of transcoding footage... I just want to bring it into FCPX and start editing. 

This is the sort of thinking that logically should end up in the "fuck it I'll get a Z8" category.

I'm with you on transcoding but indeed increasingly the faff of any kind of NLE.

I'm quite interested in whether people felt they were more productive when they had hardware devices, as in camcorders and tape decks.

The immediacy of coming home, getting the tape out of the camera and then putting it in your playback deck and assembling it onto the recording deck had a lot going for it in terms of productivity.

Maybe if we had equivalent hardware devices now instead of everything going into the multi purpose computer it might be more enjoyable to actually edit things.

And would stop the fall down the rabbit hole of tweaking the bollocks off every single shot.